I've been mulling over the question of child-made art for a little while. First of all, is it even art? A child has the intention to create(the crayon drawing of the choo-choo was no accident) so that would make it art under most definitions. But the philosophers we have studied all have a second condition for what makes something art. I'm going to attempt to shorten the definitions if possible.
Plato: Art requires intention but is also an imitation of an imitation of a form. This one is pretty simple. Children often create pictures of what they see in the world.
Tolstoy: Art must intentionally convey an emotion. Children create art all the time that expresses how they are feeling. A picture of a rainstorm? The child is most likely sad. Children expressing their feelings through art is so common that it has become a regular practice with child psychology. Speaking of which...
Freud: Art is the expression of a desire. Art can express a multitude of desires for children. The desire for their parents to give them attention, the desire to express an emotion, or a desire to attempt to interpret the world their own way.
So here the question, can anyone come up with an argument to say that young children do not create art?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment